United States v. Tartaglione, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 15-491
Decision Date | 11 April 2018 |
Docket Number | CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 15-491 |
Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. RENEE TARTAGLIONE, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4
II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 9
III. FINDINGS OF FACT ........................................................................................................ 10
IV. LEGAL STANDARD ........................................................................................................ 35
V. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ................................................................................................ 36
VI. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 65
I. INTRODUCTION
On June 23, 2017, after a five-week trial, a jury found Defendant Renee Tartaglione guilty on all counts of a fifty-three count Superseding Indictment ("Indictment"). The Indictment charged Defendant with the following:
The charges stem from Defendant's conduct in charging excessive rent to Juniata Community Mental Health Clinic ("JCMHC") and causing JCMHC to issue other unjustified payments to her, all accomplished through her position as President of its Board of Directors.
In order to fully understand the nature of Defendant's acquisition of criminal proceeds in this case, a brief discussion of her scheme to defraud JCMHC is required. Defendant gained control of JCMHC through her position as President of its Board and used its money for her own personal benefit. (Doc. No. 3 at 5, ¶¶ 23-26.) She and her co-conspirators filled JCMHC's Board of Directors with individuals whom they believed would not question her conduct. (Id. at 6, ¶ 27.) Sandy Acosta, a co-conspirator and administrator at JCMHC, would fabricate Boardminutes at the direction of Defendant and Defendant's husband, Carlos Matos, to document events that had not actually been discussed with the Board. (S. Acosta Tr. at 110:15-111:5, May 31, 2017.) Defendant, Sandy Acosta, and the other co-conspirators did not disclose to JCMHC's Board of Directors that money was being taken from JCMHC to benefit Defendant. (Doc. No. 3 at 6, ¶ 29.)
While Defendant served as President of the JCMHC Board, as part of her scheme, she caused JCMHC to issue her unauthorized payments in several ways. She caused JCMHC to make payments of above-market and excessive rent to herself and then to Norris Hancock, LLC, Defendant's solely-owned company. (Id. at 6 ¶ 30(a).) JCMHC originally paid rent for use of a building located at 2254-60 North 3rd Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ("3rd Street Building"), and thereafter for use of a building located at 2637-45 North 5th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ("5th Street Building"). She also continuously subjected JCMHC to unauthorized rent increases well above the fair market rate and caused JCMHC to pay undue and unjustified payments, including more than twelve months of rent in one year. (Id. ¶ 30(b)-(c).) It also was part of the conspiracy that beginning in July 2010, Defendant and her co-conspirators caused JCMHC to make unauthorized payments for repairs and renovations to a building that it ultimately would rent from Norris Hancock, located at the 5th Street Building. (Id. at 9, ¶ 50.)
As part of her scheme, Defendant also acquired money by causing JCMHC to issue checks to its employees, Sandy and Leslie Acosta, which they cashed and gave the money to Defendant. (Id. at 6, ¶ 30(d).) Defendant would sign the majority of the checks to Sandy and Leslie on behalf of JCMHC, Sandy and Leslie would cash their checks, and Sandy would give the cash to Defendant. (S. Acosta Tr. at 121:2-4; 122:6-10, May 31, 2017.) The check-cashing process fell into a pattern, in which Sandy and Leslie cashed checks every fifteen days foramounts ending in the numbers 22 and 78, so that they would add up to a round number. (Id. at 124:13-16; 127:3-136:20.)
This conduct formed the basis of the charges against Defendant in the Indictment. (Doc. No. 3.) In Count 1, the Indictment charges all of the conduct described above as part of the manner and means and overt acts in furtherance of...
To continue reading
Request your trial